|
Thursday, June 20, 2019
|
>> Clerk: good morning, welcome to the thursday June 6th meeting of the oversight committee.
And I'm supervisor gord an mar
and I'm joined by supervisor
brown and supervisor peskin will
be joining us shortly.
And thank you to the committee's
clerk john carroll for staffing
meeting and I'd like to thank
Mr. Hernandez at sfgov-tv.
Mr. Clerk you have announcements?
>> Clerk: ensure that you silence your cellphones and electronic devices and your speaker cards are to be submitted to the clerk.
Items acted upon today appear on
the July 9, 2019 agenda unless
otherwise stated.
>> Supervisor Mar: call agenda one.
>> Clerk: the report for the
fiscal year 2017-2018 submitted as required by the property and business improvement district
law of 1994 and the district
management agreement with the city.
>> Supervisor Mar: I'd like to
welcome helen mar, the specialist.
And helen aiola, and the executive director who are here to present on this item.
Andrea and helen, you will have
12 minutes to gather for your presentations. Thank you. >> good morning, chair mar and supervisor brown.
Helen marr with workforce
development team.
So as you May know C.V.D.S are
governed by state law or the
1994 act and the local law, article 15. This resolution covers annual
report for fiscal year 2017-2018.
Oewd ensures that all C.B.D.S or B.I.D.S are meeting their management plans. We have an annual report and C.P.A. Financial reviews and we provide the board of supervisors with a summary memo which you can find in the packet in front of you.
And the castro upper market
C.V.D. Was first established in
2005, and it is set to expire in 2020.
It's a property district with an
assessment budget of $413,500.
And it encompasses approximately
286 parcels.
And its staff is the executive
director andrea aiola who is here to present in the presentation. And their service areas are
public rights of way and sidewalk operations.
District identity and street improvements, and the
administration and corporate operations.
Oewd staff reviewed the benchmarks for castro upper market C.B.D.
The variance between the budget
amounts for each category within 10 percentage points from the management plan.
And benchmark 2, whether % of
the castro upper market
C.B.D.S came from other than assessment revenue. And bench mark three, the variance between the budget amounts for each service cat forey was within 10 percentage points from the actual.
And benchmark four, whether the c.B.D. Is indicating the funds carried over from the current fiscal year and the project to
be spent in the upcoming fiscal year. For benchmark one, the management plan versus annual
budget, the methods requirement. For benchmark two, assessment revenue and other income, they also message requirement and
they greatly exceeded their
general benefit requirement of
5% with a non-assessment revenue
of 7.4% of their total budget.
And for budget actuals, their variance point were within 10 percentage points so they met this requirement as well.
And they had indicated their carryover is down in their annual report. And our findings and recommendations for
castro upper
market C.B.D. Are as
follows: they met all benchmarks and requirements and they
perform well with benchmark two with a variety of city grants and for donations they received throughout the year. It was determined that the C.B.D. Was in violation of the brown act. And oewd believes that it was due to the governing board turnover and the C.B.D. Rectified the situation immediately upon being contacted by oewd.
And they're set to sunset on
June 30, 2020, and have begun their renewal campaign and our
staff will provide technical assistance to guide them through the process. In conclusion, they have performed well in implementing their service plan in the district and they continue to successfully market and bruce
events like live in the castro. They increased their opportunities and partnering
with communities stakeholders
and municipal agencies for the
employization of castro care and they maintained an active board
of directors and a robust committee. If there are no questions for
staff I'd like to invite Miss
Aiola up to present. >> good morning, supervisors.
Thank you for this opportunity
to present our annual report for 2017-2018.
So I'll just briefly -- here we
go -- the community benefit
district in the castro is an unusual footprint. It is long.
We go from octavia and market streets, so where the freeway
ends, all the way up to castro street and castro downtown 19th.
And we include the 100 block of
safeway on church street, and go down church street to almost 15th and then we have a little
side streets to capture some of the commercial that is just off of market street.
But it's a very long and almost, you know, market street up there is just kind of long and almost
suburban in some ways. We have lots of active committees for such a small C.B.D. We have an executive committee
and a finance committee, and our district identity streetscape
committee and overseas all of
our beautification, marketing,
land use, retail strategy efforts, and our live in the castro efforts. and we have a volunteer program
called "castro ambassadors" and that committee oversees that. Our services committee oversees
our two large contracts with our
cleaning team "block by block" and our public safety efforts which is a contract with the patrol special police. We have a land-use committee
that weighs in on development issues in the neighborhood. And we have a retail strategy
committee that is working very
hard on trying to curb the commercial vacancies in the neighborhood and developing strategies to do that, whether they're marketing strategies and whether we're looking at ways
that we can help businesses get through the city planning
department and other regulations.
And then we have a castro cares leadership team that is truly a
collaborative effort with all of the major neighborhood associations and also non-profits and religious organizations in the neighborhood. All working together.
It's a castro care is both -- we have additional law enforcement
so we pay for additional patrol special police to enforce existing laws.
And then we have 20 hours a week
of homeless outreach services
that we contract with through the san francisco aids foundation.
And we often do additional cleaning in the evening to make sure that the neighborhood is clean on weekend evenings during
the dining hours until about
9:30 at night.
And so in the organizations that
we partner with include the castro merchants and the neighborhood association and the triangle neighborhood association and the plaza.
And we also partner with most
holy redeemer catholic church and st. Francis lutheran church and the aids foundation.
And we are very, very close with
our city family members, public
works, sfpd mission station, recology, and M.D.A. And the department of homeless and
supportive housing. We have recurring grants with the city through oewd for our castro cares program and for the
jane morner improvement program.
Both are critical -- at this
point those grants are critical
components of our budget and provide -- help us to provide our critical cleaning, security, and activation services.
We also had a grant from the
horizons foundation for the harvey pleasea
plaza at problem project.
It's the fiscal agent for the plaza.
And we imagine a rebuilding project.
And so last year we picked up 113,950-pounds of trash, that's
the equivalent of about
4.5recology trucks, you know, garbage trucks.
And we picked up about 2,800
instances of what we call
"hazardous waste" but it's as we
know code brown, human feces. Graffiti continues to go in waves throughout the district so we're constantly -- our commitment to the property
owners is within 24 hours of
notification to remove graffiti.
We have these dispatch cards
that have our dispatch -- our cleaning dispatch number that we aggressively hand out to all of
the merchants and post on social media to have people alert us about graffiti in the neighborhood. And our management plan calls for quarterly steam cleaning. That's not nearly enough.
We try to steam clean every
parcel once a month.
But our -- the management plan
expectations with our assessment
budget is quarterly, once every three months.
And then as I said we have a cleaning dispatch telephone number that is being used more and more.
So that's really, really great.
Examples of how graffiti happens
all over the district -- graffiti on brick buildings is particularly difficult to get off. You could only get it off with
power washing and that's one of
-- that's our dedicated power washer. But, you know, steam cleaning sidewalks really makes a difference and it makes for the
neighborhood to feel and smell clean.
Public safety, as I said, we
fund the patrol special police.
And they're not dedicated to the
castro C.B.D., but, rather, the
castro has been using the san francisco patrol special police
to supplement the san francisco
police department services, probably for about 40 years in the neighborhood, and how they work is they have individual clients and they have private
clients and they put together a budget based on the number of clients they have and how much they can charge each client.
so we're one of those clients.
And our contribution enables them to be out basically until the bars close. So they're here in the neighborhood from 4:00 P.M. To
1:00 A.M. On weekdays and on
weekends until 3:00 A.M.. They work really collaboratively
with the police department, and one of the advantages of the patrol specialists is that they
are on the police radio so they can respond to incidences really, really quickly and get
police there for backup. Events and highlights that we
have going on in the
neighborhood -- so this year as
helen said we continually raise
about half of our budget in non-assessment dollars.
And it's critical, because after
15 years, 14 years really, our
budget is about $516,000 for about 20 blocks.
And I would say that that -- even though it's not in this
powerpoint, that is our biggest
challenge is our budget and continuing to raise about half
of the budget in non -- assessment
dollars is critical and essential.
And we -- those extra dollars as
I said fund not only, you know, nice things but they fund critical services.
Live in the castro. Harvey's halo. We had a great event to
celebrate the 40th anniversary of harvey's election. This was the harvey halo celebration and we collaborated with ben davis who put on the
bay lights to have an incredible celebration in 2017. This is our volunteers that
welcome visitors to the neighborhood. And we had funded through the
city and through oewd, this is
our temporary public arts called "the seed."
do I need to stop? I'm out?
>> if you could wrap up quickly. >> so challenges -- we need more foot patrols on market street and we have them on castro but not market. And cardboard disposal is a huge problem throughout the city and in our neighborhood. And commercial vacancies are a huge problem. And, of course, all over the
city but in our neighborhood especially. Mentally ill and substance abuse people living on street.
And castro cares is showing some improvements in the neighborhood
and helping people who are in need. We're working on with the supervisor on targeting the delays in the system for reach
out strategy to improve --
decrease our commercial vacancies. And we just want to continue what we're doing.
Public arts -- things that can bring more foot traffic to the neighborhood will also work to decrease the commercial
vacancies and if we can increase police patrols that will help to
make people safe, feel safe and come to the neighborhood more often. So thank you very much.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, actually thank you for the really informative presentation and for all of the good work. Colleagues, do you have any questions or comments? thank you. Are there any members of the public that wish to testify on
this item?
Seeing none public comment is closed. Colleagues can we recommend this
item to the full board without
objection? Great.
Mr. Clerk, call items 2, 3 and 4
together.
>> Clerk: agenda items 2 through four are three resolutions to authorize the mayor to cast ballots in the affirmative for the proposed civic center community benefit district union square and improvement district and the downtown benefit district with respect to certain parcels of real property owned by the city that would be subject to
assessment in said districts.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
I welcome Mr. Chris corgis here
to present on these items. Mr. Corgis you have six minutes for your presentation. >> thank you, chair, and good
morning, supervisors, I'm the senior program manager with oewd, that oversees the C.B.D. Program on behalf of the city. And today I'm here presenting on
three similar resolutions authorizing the mayor to have the affirmative for the expansion for the civic center C.B.D., and the union square bid, and the proposed formation
of the downtown C.B.D. For parcels owned by the city which the board of supervisors has
jurisdiction over. And that election is closing on July 9th. The civic center and downtown
C.B.D. Ballots went out on may 31st and that election closes
on July 16th, both through committees of the whole. Union square has a total of nine
city parcels, seven of which the city has jurisdiction over and
the other two are exclusive to fstma. And the city obligation for all
nine is $339,655,.75.
And the civic center has 15
parcels under jurisdiction for
$969,056,034, and the downtown
C.B.D. Has two parcels for
$6,144 or 1,600th percent of the total budget.
And each C.B.D. Parcel can be found on each resolution starting on page 2, line 18.
Are there any questions for staff?
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Mr. Corgis.
Do you have any questions or comments? >> I have no questions or comments but subject to public comment I would send all three items to the full board with
recommendation as committee reports.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Are there any members of the public that wish to comment on these items? Please step forward.
You have two minutes. >> good morning, executive director of the union square bid
and I want to thank chris corgis
for being our liaison throughout this renewal process and thank you all for your support in recommending this. And I appreciate the city coming
forward and supporting the bid renewal. It is important. It is a partnership.
And I know that in the union square bid we're asking our owners to considerably increase
our assessments and asked for a 65% budget increase with some paying more than that. So it's really important that
the city not only do their baseline service but show that they are supportive of our efforts so that we can continue to move forward and make sure that union square is a desirable destination to live, work and visit. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Anyone else that would like to
speak on this item?
Seeing none, public comment is closed.
So, colleagues, can we move this forward with positive recommendation? >> as committee reports, Mr. Chair?
>> Supervisor Mar: oh, yeah, as committee reports.
Thank you. Mr. Clerk.
Call item 5.
>> Clerk: agenda item number 5 is authorizing the general manager of the san francisco public utilities commission to execute the fourth amendment to the memorandum of understanding with the san francisco local
agency formation commission,
lavco and extending the term by one year for a term of 12 years
through fiscal year 2019-2020, with no change to the total
amount not to exceed $2,100,000
pursuant to charter section 9.118.
>> Supervisor Mar: I'd like to
recognize Mr. Hines, with clean power. You have five minutes for your presentation. >> thank you, supervisors, good morning, I'm hoping that I will need less than that. I have prepared remarks on this item for you. And so you have before you a resolution authorizing the general manager of the public utilities commission to execute
a one-year extension of the memorandum of understanding
between the P.U.C. And the san
francisco local agency formation
commission, or sflafco.
To extend the duties by sflafco
to advise the P.U.C. And with clean power development.
And the implementation, for a duration of 12 years.
From fiscal year 2008-2009
through fiscal year 2019-2020 with no changes to the total not
to exceed amount of $2.1 million.
Since 2009, P.U.C. And lafco
staff have worked cooperatively
to develop clean power with the M.O.U. And M.O.U. Has been amended three times since we commenced working together, extending the terms of the agreement through this current fiscal year.
The extension would only provide
one year of additional time on the M.O.U. And does not include any additional funding. Work to be performed over the next year of the agreement will
rely on approximately $200,000
remaining of that initial $2.1 million.
Based on discussions with lafco's assistant director we anticipate they'll use the remaining funds to hire a
consultant to support lafco's oversight of clean power S.F. And the implementation,
including the review of upcoming
integrated energy resource and 10-year capital planning work and the development of new energy programs and services to assist disadvantaged and low-income communities in san francisco with their energy burden. That concludes my remarks and I'm happy to take any questions that you might have.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
Colleagues, any questions? Thanks are thank you. Now I'd like to invite the budget and legislative analyst office to share their findings on this item.
>> good morning, chair.
And I'm with the budget analyst office. The board is being asked to approve a one-year extension
between P.U.C. And lafco.
And extended to fiscal year 2019-2020. And it would actually -- as Mr. Hines said it does not increase the amount as we see in
our report, about $1.89 million has been spent under this agreement so far and the
remaining balance is about $200,000 which would be spent on continuing oversight of clean
power S.F. And we recommend approval.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Any questions? Okay.
I just wanted to say that as a
member of the lafco commission I thank the P.U.C. For your
support of the important work of lafco, providing oversight to clean power S.F.
So, yeah, thank you.
And, colleagues, can we send
these -- can we send this item to the full board?
>> Clerk: before we do that it's necessary to take public comment on this agenda item.
>> Supervisor Mar: any members of the public that wish to testify on this item?
Seeing none, public comment is closed. Can we send these items to the
full board with positive
recommendation? Thanks.
Mr. Clerk, call item number 6.
>> Clerk: agenda item number 6 is a resolution declaring the intent of the city and county of san francisco to reimburse certain expenditures from
proceeds of future bonded indebtedness, thursdaying the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development to submit an application to permit the
issuance of revenue bonds in an aggregate principal amount not
to exceed $40 million for
500-520 furk street and 555 larkin street.
And to direct the controllers office to hold in trust not an
amount not to exceed $100,000.
And authorizing the director to
pay an amount to such deposit to the city of california and if
they fail to have this for
purposes of I.R.S. Code of 1986 as amended and the issuance and sale of residential mortgage revenue bonds by the city in an
aggregate amount not to exceed $48 million. And authorizing and directing the execution of any documents necessary to implement this resolution and ratifying and
approving any action heretofore, defined within the resolution.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
I'd like to recognize joyce slamm. And you have up to five minutes for your presentation. Thank you. >> good morning, supervisors.
Again, my name is joyce lynn and
I'm from the mayor's office of housing and community development.
This item relates to a bond
issuance for 500 turk and
500-520 turk street and 555 larkin street. And it's to approve the hearing to comply with the federal tax ecwitdy and the financial responsibility act. Or tefra.
And to apply for bond financing with the california debt allocation committee.
The proposed bond issuance will
be conduit financing and it does not require the city to pledge
any funds to repayment to the bond.
500 turk street is a 108-unit affordable multifamily new construction project located at
the corner of turk street and larkin street. All units will be affordable and
serve households averaging 50%
of the san francisco unadjusted
area median income. With 27 project based units reserved for residents wishing to move from public housing to the project.
Currently the site is a tire and automotive service business. Based off the negotiation with the project sponsor the business owner has agreed to relocate
their business to another
location they own. They plan to return to the board for bond issuance approval for
this project later this year and we anticipate that the project will close construction financing and start construction in January 2020.
And here with me today is katie
lamont and jacob goldstein from
the tenderloin development for 500 turk street.
On behalf the sponsors we would like to thank you for your consideration here today and we look forward to your support on 500 turk street. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
Any questions, colleagues?
Thank you very much. Are there any members of the public that wish to testify on
this item? Seeing none, public comment is closed. I move that we send this item to the full board with positive recommendation.
Can we take that without objection? Thank you.
Mr. Clerk, call item number 7.
>> Clerk: agenda item number upon is declaring the intent of the city and the county of san
francisco to reimburse certain expenditures, with the mayor's office of housing and community
development to submit the
documents to the california debt limit allocation committee to have bonds in a principal amount
not to exceed $103 million for 1064-10678 mission.
And the directors to hold in
trust the amount not to exceed
$100,000 in accordance with cdlac procedures and to certify
that the cdlac -- that the city
has on deposit the required amount, to pay an amount equal
to the deposit if they fail to issue the bonds. And approving for purposes of
the I.R.S. Code of 1986 as amended the issuance and the sale of residential mortgage
revenue bonds by the city in an
aggregate amount not to exceed $103 million, and the related documents as defined within the resolution text.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you,
I'd like to recognize zone Mcnamara. You have up to five minutes for
your presentation. Thanks. >> thank you. Good morning supervisors and chair mar.
I'm with the housing and community development. It's related to the city's bond
issuance for 1064-1068 mission street. The purpose of the resolution is
to approve the hearing the city conducted to comply with the federal tax equity and financial responsibility act or tefra.
And to enable the project to apply for tax exempt bond
financing to the california debt allocation committee.
And the proposed issuance will
be conduit financing and it will not require the city to pledge any of its funds to the repayment of the bond. The project is the new
construction of 258 supportive
housing units developed by mercy
housing california and episcopal community services of san francisco.
The project will consist of two residential buildings, one for
seniors aged 55 years and older, experiencing homelessness.
And one for adults experiencing homelessness.
And each will have its own
entrance, service and community spaces. The project will be built on land that's currently owned by the federal government which will be transferred to the city
as part of the construction
financing closing process.
The tom wadell urgent care clinic will be relocated to the
site and the clinic will include D.P.H.S street and medicine
program and dental services and
H.S.H.'s homeless outreach team.
E.C.S. Will also relocate and
expand its distinctive chef's
program, a culinary job-training
program for people experiencing homelessness. They plan to return to the board
for bond issuance approval for
this project later this year. We anticipate the project will close construction financing and
start construction in January 2020.
On behalf of mercy health in
california, E.C.S., and I'd like
to thank you for your consideration today. We look forward for your
continued support.
My colleague amy chan is here
with me with mercy housing california and with that I'd like to conclude the staff report. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you,
Miss Mcnamara. Colleagues, do you have any questions? Thank you very much. Miss Campbell, does the office
have any findings on this item? Okay. Are there any members of the public that wish to testify on
this item?
Seeing none, public comment is closed.
i move that we send this item to the full board with positive recommendation.
Can we take that without objection?
Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please call items 8 and 9 together.
>> Clerk: agenda number 8 is a resolution authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development to execute a local operating subsidy program grant
agreement with 275-10th street associates L.P.
A california limited partnership to provide operating subsidies
for formerly homeless adult households at bishop swing
community house at 275-10th street.
And for 15 years and six months
from July 1, 2019, through
December 31,2034, to not exceed $5,579,553. Agenda item 9 is authorizing the director of the mayor's office of housing and community development to execute a local operating subsidy program grant agreement with mason street housing associates L.P., also a
california limited partnership.
To to the formerly homeless adult households at 149 mason
street for the term of 15 years
and six months from July 1,
2019, through December 31,2034,
in an amount not to exceed $18,135, 164.
>> Supervisor Mar: I'd like to
recognize scott madden from omchd. You have up to five minutes to present. Thank you.
>> thank you, supervisor mar.
Supervisor brown, and supervisor peskin. good morning. The mayor's office of housing and community development is seeking the board of supervisors' approval of the renewal of two expiring
contracts under the city's local
operating subsidy program.
The renewal would provide for
the operating cost subsidies at two affordable housing developments and the first is
the house at 275-10th street and the second is the mason
street apartments at 149 mason. Both provide permanent supportive housing to 131
extremely low-income formerly homeless adults.
The two contracts together would
compromise $23.7 million in city financing which would be
provided over a period of 15.5
years starting this July 1st. The local operating subsidy
program was created in 2004 in connection with the city's
10-year plan to abolish chronic homelessness. One of the pillars of that plan
was to create 3,000 units of
permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless individuals and families.
And the basic element of the
program is that it provides an
operating subsidy to cover the
difference between extremely low tenant rental revenue and the
total operating costs of these buildings.
And the subsidies are sized to
fund break-even budgets, including conventional operating
expenses, debt service, reserves
and partnership management fees. And annual disbursements are
provided according to scheduled
amounts with adjustments made as
appropriate based on any
surpluses from prior years.
And the disbursements under the program are subject to annual
budget appropriations by the board. O.C.D. Administered the program with the department of homelessness and supportive housing budget. Currently the program has 32
buildings under its purview,
representing 1,161 units, that serve a variety of target
populations from seniors to transition-aged youth, single
individuals and families with children.
In 2017, the program supported 1,454 households representing a
total of 2,061 people. And now to the contracts themselves, the one for bishop swing community house would be
for $5.6 million, and that would
be over a 15.5 year period
starting next month and ending in 2034.
And it would cover 75 of the total 135 units in the project
which is abouta
about 55% and the other
by section 8 and continuum of care rental assistance vouchers.
The building opened in 2009 and
it's an attractive five-story building in western soma.
And the it has 135 studio units with outdoor community and service space.
In addition there are about
3,000 square feet of commercial
space on the full some street of the building. The owner is an affiliate of the,
theepiscopal community services, and with the affiliate of mission housing and the
supportive services are also provided by E.C.S. With funding from the department of homelessness and supportive housing.
The target population is extremely low income single individuals. 63 of the units in the project are set aside for folks who
either have mental illness,
H.I.V./aids, chronic addiction and intellectual disability or
some form of long-term chronic health condition.
Average annual income at the
project is currently 13% of the median income which is characterized as extremely low.
That is less than $11,000 per year.
It has served 600 individuals since it opened 10 years ago. And the average length of tenancy is about 5.5 years and about a third of the current residents have been in place since the project opened. So there's a bit of stability there.
And for 149 mason street, that
contract is $18.1 million --
I'll wrap up -- and also
provided over 15.5 years. That contract would support most
of the units at that project, 55 out of 56.
And the owner is an affiliate of glide economic development corporation with property management from the john stewart company. And supportive services are
provided by glide community
housing. With funds from H.S.H. As well as the department of public
health. Both these projects are attractive, well managed and highly supportive permanent
housing for extremely low income
formerly homeless individuals. They're important resources in the city's array of services and programs that alleviate homelessness.
And both projects merit renewed lost funding to continue to serve homeless folks well into the future. Thank you for your attention and I'm available to answer any questions that you May have as
is my colleague, senior asset manager mike malone.
And I would like to introduce
liz pocok, the director of housing development and asset management. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Mr. Madden.
Any questions, colleagues?
Great, thank you.
Miss Campbell, does the D.L.A. Have findings to share? >> yes, the board of supervisors is being asked to approve two
local operating subsidy program agreements and each is for 15
years and six months and one for
the bishop house at $5.6 million
and the other for 149 mason street of $18.1 million over the term of the agreement.
So table four and page 9 of our report summarizes this.
And the per unit cost at bishop swing over a 15-year term is
about $74,000.
And up to 75 units for 129 mason
is $123,000 for 56 units.
The variance really has to do
with bishop swing actually a
much larger building with 135 total units so at that operating costs are being spread over a larger number of units with other funding sources.
And we do recommend approval.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. are there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item?
Seeing none, public comment is closed. I'd like to move that we send these items to the full board with positive recommendation.
Can we take that without objection?
Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please call item number 10.
>> Clerk: agenda number 10 is a resolution approving the first amendment of the grant between the city and county of san
francisco and wu yee children's services for the provision of early head start and head start support services to support the city's implementation of the san francisco citywide plan for early care and education.
To increase the amount by
$4,122,076 for a total amount of
$11,786,599 and extend the grant term by one year to commence
July 1, 2019, for the total
agreement term of July 1, 2017,
through June 30, 2020.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
I'd like to recognize the H.S.A. Here to present on this item.
You have five minutes for your presentation.
>> thank you.
Good morning, I'm the office of this. We request authorize to modify
the grant with wu yee children's
services for an additional $4,122,076.
For a new total grant amount of
$11,786,599 and to extend the
term one year to June 30th, 2020. And the approval of this
contract will ensure that wu yee children's services will
continue its operation from
enrolling the eligible children, providing program services to
their families. And in addition funding will
support wu yee in managing the program to ensure proper
staffing levels at each site and classroom and to deliver high quality early learning experiences to each child
enrolled in their program. I'm available to answer any questions that you have about
the question and we also have
another person to discuss the procurement process.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Colleagues, do you have any questions? Thank you. And Miss Campbell, does the D.L.A. Have findings to share on this item? >> the board is asked to approve the first amendment to the existing agreement between
H.S.A. And wu yee for early care and education and the current agreement is $7.7 million and this extends it by one year and
increase by about $4.1 million
through the fiscal year 2019-20
for $11.8 million.
And we summarize the terms,
financial terms, on table 1, page 13 of our report. Because this agreement contains contingencies in the prior two
years that were not used we actually do recommend a
reduction of $420,870 from the
proposed not to exceed
$11.8 million to $11.4 million and otherwise we recommend approval as recommended.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Miss Campbell. I'm sorry, just on your
recommendation about the reduction.
Is that something that we would
need to take action on? >> yes, you would need to amend
the resolution to send it to the
full board with the lower amount.
>> Supervisor Mar: and -- >> I believe that the department
can provide you with the amended resolution to submit to the full board.
>> Supervisor Mar: okay, great. Colleagues, do you have any
questions or comments? So maybe -- we should have a
motion to amend -- yeah.
>> Clerk: let's take public comment first.
>> Supervisor Mar: okay. Any members of the public that
would like to testify on this item?
Seeing none, public comment is
closed.
I would make a motion that we
amend the item to reduce the amount by the amount that Miss Campbell stated. Was it --
>> Clerk: $420,870.
>> Supervisor Mar: yes.
So on the amendment, the amended
-- well, a motion to amend the
item without objection?
And then can we -- I would also move that we send this item to
the full board as amended and with positive recommendation.
>> Clerk: this was requested as a committee report, Mr. Chair.
>> Supervisor Mar: as a
committee report.
Without objections?
Thank you.
Mr. Clerk call item 11.
>> Clerk: item 11 is a resolution authorizing the human services agency to continue its
membership in the 18 county
california welfare network consortium and approving the
operations agreement to the technology services L.L.C. And
the welfare client data system consortium counties for the
city's share of the oversight of
D.X.C. Technology contract for
the implementation of calwin. And authorizing the executive
director to expand the authority
from $82,571,463 to an
additional amount of $5,716,385
for the period from February 1,
2020, through January 31,2023,
for a total project budget of
$88,287,848 for the period of
July 1,1999 through January 31, 2023.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
I'd like to recognize H.S.A.
Here to present on this item. You have up to five minutes for your presentation. >> thank you. Good morning, chair mar and supervisor brown and supervisor peskin. I'm the contract director for the human services agency and the human service agency requests the authorization for a
continued participation in the calwin cob sort yum and the use
of the calwin services through
the D.X.C. Technology services.
To increase the authority from
about $83.5 million to $88.3 million from the period of 1999 to 2023.
And the human services agency manages several public benefits
programs including cal fresh and medi-cal and foster care eligibility and employment services. And every california county uses
one of three large client database systems to manage
eligibility and to make payments
to clients and providers. These are the primary systems that eligibility workers and employment specialists use every day in their work. San francisco has been part of
an 18-county consortium since
1999 and using the calwin system. And this system began development in 1999 and then it
went fully operational in 2005.
And so the county has been using calwin for 14 years.
In four years, in 2023, the state will move to a single
state-wide system called calsaw
and that's used by all 58 counties.
This resolution allows to fund the use of the system until the
new calsaw system is in place in 2023.
I'd be glad to answer any questions that you have.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Colleagues, any questions? Thank you.
Miss Campbell, is there findings to share on this item?
>> the board of supervisors is
asked to agree to the continued
membership in the calwin
consortium and this started in 1999 and to bees to
99 continues to 2023.
And it's $82.6 million, this
increases by another
$5.7 million to $88.3 million.
To date through fiscal year
2017-2018, total expenditures
under the calwin agreement are $66.3 million and they provided
a budget for the remaining $24.7 million through 2023 that
includes a 12% contingency and we recommend approval.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Miss Campbell. Are there any members of the public that would like to testify on this item? Seeing none, the public comment
is now closed. And colleagues can we recommend this item to the full board without objection?
Thank you. Mr. Clerk.
Call item number 12.
>> Clerk: you want do that as a committee report? It was requested as a committee report.
>> Supervisor Mar: okay, move this -- recommend this item to the full board as a committee
report without objection?
Thank you. Mr. Clerk call item 12.
>> President Yee: agenda number 12 is directing the
budget analyst to conduct four
performance odd yits in fiscal
year 2019-2020 for the effectiveness of the city departments' pre-apprenticeship and workforce development and community benefit programs. And the policies and the procedures of the mayor's office of housing and community development for the acquisition
of sites for the development or preservation of affordable housing, and public works'
street resurfacing program and street tree maintenance program.
And removing from the 2018-2019 audit work plan the performance audit of the city's workforce development programs for low-income, homeless and formerly homeless adults.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Before us is a motion to set the
budget for the next fiscal year. and I'm calling for audits of
city departments, workforce development and community benefits program and homeless
services provided by supportive housing.
And mochd policies and programs for acquiring and preserving
affordable housing and street tree maintenance by public works. And audits are crucial for oversight and accountability and
by prioritizing audits for these crucial city services and programs we can ensure that
we're using the city's best strategies and means for addressing some of the biggest challenges facing us. Affordable housing, homelessness, workforce development and more. As a representative of my constituents, as a member of this board, and as chair of the
government audit and oversight committee, I'm deeply committeed to the essential oversight functions that we provide for public services. It's essential for our own effectiveness and the ethicity as a city.
And for the trust in the public places in us.
I'd like to thank the budget analyst office for her partnership in preparing this motion.
And my co-sponsors, supervisors
brown and President Norman yee. I look forward to working with you all as these audits move forward to ensure our public
services are meeting the public needs. Chair, I'd like to -- or I'd
like to welcome severn campbell
from the office to speak to this item. >> just very briefly, we're actually completing three audits
now that were requested for 2018-2019 2019. The audit for the congestion
management of the M.T.A. And the oewd's oversight of construction projects and impact on small businesses, and an audit of the potential transition of the
housing authority to the city. So the audits are near completion and the report should be submitted to the board of supervisors hopefully shortly. We would be able to begin these requested audits as of July 1st as soon as the budget review is completed. We would conduct the audits one at a time in the order which they're in the motion unless
request was made to go out of order.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Miss Campbell.
Any questions or comments, colleagues? Are there any members of the public that would like to
testify on this item?
Seeing none public comment is closed. Colleagues can we recommend this
item to the full board without objection?
Thank you.
Mr. Clerk, please call item 13.
>> Clerk: Mr. Chair, agenda
number 13 is scheduled for an
11:00 special order, 11:00 will
happen in about four minutes.
>> Supervisor Mar: sorry.
>> Clerk: we couldn't call the item until after 11:00 is struck.
>> Supervisor Mar: so we'll
hold off on that and can we go
to -- yeah -- can you call item 14.
>> Clerk: the balance of today's agenda are the closed session items and it May make
sense to call a recess until 11:00 strikes.
>> Supervisor Mar: that's good.
So we'll recess now until 11:00.
>> Clerk: government audit and oversights June 20th regular
meeting is back in session from recess.
>> Supervisor Mar: call item 13.
>> Clerk: an ordinance to
amend the code to establish the cooperative living opportunities
for mental health fund and the mental health program to fund
the residential properties to be operated as communal properties
for those with chronic mental
health disorders and omchd and the department of public health
to establish policies to issue funds from the fund in authorizing the department of
public health to place clients in properties financed by the fund and to have monitoring and oversight for such properties.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, I recognize amy binder from supervisor ronen's office to present on this item. >> thank you so much, supervisors. I appreciate you taking this item today.
And I apologize that supervisor ronen is buried deep in budget and finance committee hearing today and wasn't able to be here. I know that she would have liked to present personally.
So the legislation before you
authored by supervisor ronen and co-authored by supervisor haney is for presents for the loan fund and program to help to address the crisis of people
living on our streets.
It enables non-profit organizations to have apartments
and single family homes to have non-institutional facilitated communal households in which four or five people with chronic mental illness can share a home assisted with an individual and a household case management services that are available on-call 24/7. The legislation establishes a
fund under the code to receive
and disburse funds including the $5 million prioritized through
the board's work together on housing bonds.
But also funds through the
budget and through philanthropy and other sources yet to be identified.
And they would issue to nonprofits to purchase the eligible properties and dph would expand on the current contracts or issue new ones to enable those non-profits to provide the services.
D.P.H. Would be the party that would determine the client eligibility and authorize the
client placement and we know that much of the services funding can be recouped through medi-cal. And this program is in response
to one of the most imlairing crises in san francisco, our response to the mental health situation on our streets is -- we know that there's a significant lack of housing options for people existing residential treatment programs
and D.P.H., in fact, reported
that 44% of the people exiting those programs were leaving
without a place identified for them to go next.
And we know that this particular model does work. Several of our most respected
mental health providers and the
progress foundation and positive
resource center and they have been operating throughout san francisco for years. Until now almost all of those
have been master leased and with
the current rental market in san francisco, it's just not a reliable way to hold on to housing and so the intent of
this is that new units could be acquired and existing properties might be available and feasible and that we would be able to
grow the program as both needed and an appropriate housing option. And supervisor ronen is asking for your support to forward this to the full board as a committee
report and with your recommendation.
And a huge thank you to steve
fields and richard
rich heasley, and andrew is not here, to sharing
their wisdom and experience in shaping this. And over the past several weeks
we have worked with kelly romdoo
and craig wagner of D.P.H. And
kate hartley of O.C.D. And they helped to refine the legislation and their insights are behind most of the amendments introduced today. And I'm happy to answer any
questions and also we have others here to answer any questions. I don't know, shall I describe the amendment?
is that the way to do this now? Or you have them before you and they're highlighted.
And they are -- they are
intended to make the program work better.
So we've done things that just clarify that the program will be
functional for both D.P.H. And I can get into the details if you
would like that.
>> Supervisor Mar: yeah, thank you.
Colleagues, do you have any
questions?
So I'd like to welcome kate
hartley from mochd up. And if you want to share some
remarks on this item. >> thank you, supervisors. Kate hartley the mayor's office of housing and community development.
We are happy to be working with
D.P.H. And the providers and we
look forward to the ability to
provide an expansion of housing
model that works for this
population.
So we expect to have a serious collaboration with D.P.H. To make sure that all of the elements of the program are fully covered. And that is still to be determined but I think that we
have a good start.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
Supervisor brown.
>> Supervisor Brown: hi. Miss Hartley, do you have enough staff to really handle this, to
be able to -- do you have the
capacity to be able to manage this program? >> our staff right now is
stretched pretty thin because of
the small size program has
expanded and new money has come
in to further bring in new
properties under small sites.
It's a very laborious process to
underwrite a small building with existing residents in it and to do their rehab without
disrupting the tenants who live
there.
This particular program we
anticipate will probably start
off somewhat slowly.
We do have $5 million reserved
in the bond, so should the
voters pass the bond, that would get us going.
But because the residents of the
program will not be paying rents
that actually will leverage
outside debt or repay our debt,
the rents that the residents of
the programs will pay will go
likely to operations. We -- it will be a different model which is why we really
need to work with D.P.H. Closely. So our staff can oversee the
acquisition and the rehab of the properties and then we expect to
be able to transfer the assets
to D.P.H. And because they'll be overseeing -- they'll be conducting contract management with the providers.
And they'll be overseeing the
lease -- the compliance with the program requirements. We will put a date of trust on the properties so that if there's a termination of the use
of the property for -- which it is intended -- if there's a sale or if there's a transfer, we will make sure that we recoup
the city's investments.
But it won't be -- we don't anticipate that our staff will
be conducting a long-term sort of asset management because it
just doesn't -- the program doesn't operate in the way that
small sites do or other multifamily rental buildings do.
So that's a long-winded answer to your question. I'm not sure yet because we
don't know what the scale of this will be with the $5 million and purchasing -- either a
single family home or a small building.
We anticipate in the first year
that there May be one or two properties that the funding will cover. If there's additional funding
that comes forward for this program and we need to ramp up,
then we will need additional staffing because it's a very
labor intensive process to manage the acquisition and rehab
of a single-family home or a small building.
But, again, we're -- we're happy
to be working with D.P.H. And we
know the need is there and so we
will move forward accordingly.
>> Supervisor Brown: thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Supervisor peskin, any questions? Thank you, Miss Hartley. >> thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: I'd like to
recognize severn campbell from the office to share her findings on this item.
>> in terms of this fiscal impact of this proposed
ordinance, I would confirm what Miss Hartley said which is that we did not make any estimates on
the cost to either D.P.H. Or mochd for staffing because the scale of the program at this time isn't known. And any additional staffing costs or resource costs would be subject to the board of approval during the budget process. We did, however -- and we didn't receive it in time for our report -- but we got the legislation -- the legislation requires D.P.H. To provide the
support operating costs for cooperative living environment. And so we did get some numbers from D.P.H. After our report
went out where, for four person cooperative living household they would estimate costs of
about $73,000 to be paid by D.P.H.
And these would actually be
offset by rent or by medi-cal reimburse minutes so the net
cost is about $42,000 so the
total cost to D.P.H. Would be determined on the scale of the
program and how many agreements
were funded through this fund.
We consider approval of the ordinance to be a policy matter for the board.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
Any questions, colleagues? Sorry, are there any members of the public that wish to testify on this item? I have two speaker cards here.
Steve fields and richard heasley. >> thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.
I'm steve fields, the executive director of progress foundation,
a non-profit behavioral health provider in san francisco.
Been doing it since 1969.
And we've been operating this
model of service since 1971 in
the county as a part of our continuum.
I think that the key to the
discussion around cooperative apartment settings is probably a key to this whole discussion
that we're having now about reforming and fixing our behavioral health system.
We don't have enough places where after we've invested in
treatment in our clients -- maybe in-patient care and acute
diversion from the hospital, and 90-day residential treatment -- and then people leave after an intensive treatment experience and they go back to a community
where the supportive housing is
often in the very neighborhood that was the source of much of the problem that created the use
of drugs and the continuing mental illness.
So our model of using co-op apartments is that integrated
scattered site apartments in neighborhoods all over the city. So clients aren't all congregated in one part of the city. But they get to live and experience living as any of us
would in communities all around the city.
Those apartments are intensely
supported by case management,
which is a medi-cal reimbursable service so it brings in significant revenue for the structure. And so this is to me the way in
which we address recidivism and retention in the community for
our most disabled clients.
And I urge that you move this forward in the interest of the clients we serve. Thank you.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Mr. Fields.
Next speaker.
>> good morning members of the commission and the chair.
I'm richard hes aley, the executive director of connor house.
we provide residential
communities to adults who are
recovering from mental illness and more recently dealing with a
lot of people who have also been
chronically homeless.
And we started operating our
first co-op in 1963. We found that the people who were graduating from our
residential treatment facility,
the original connor house, had actually had nowhere to exit so
we started master leasing
apartment buildings -- apartment
units often in other apartment buildings.
A lot of triplexes, railroad flats, where we could get three
to four bedrooms for conregat
living for three or four or five people.
We have 68 people in residence
in 19 such units right now and
they are invisible in five
supervisorial districts because have no signage and we have
virtually every presence in the neighborhood just like every one of our neighbors has. And our folks who live there come and go.
I think that the most sailain't
thing about it is that it's to
create a normalized residential setting as we can create.
So we are paying particular
attention to complying with the homestead act where people should live in the least restrictive settings possible.
That's what co-op units actually are and they operate at about half of the costs when you buy them and operate them than they do whether you master lease them.
We have some of both and long
experience with both, both
finance through the mayor's office.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you, Mr. Heasley. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public that wish to testify on this item? Seeing none, public comment is
now closed.
Colleagues, can we amend the
legislation as proposed by -- as
presented by supervisor ronen?
Without objection? Thank you. And can we move this item to the
full board as amended as a
committee report without objection? Thank you.
Thanks, everyone.
So, Mr. Clerk, call items number
14 to 20 for closed session.
>> Clerk: ajenda items 14 through 20 are various ordinances authorizing the settlements of lawsuits against
the city and county of san
francisco.
>> Supervisor Mar: are there any members of the public who wish to testify on the items
that will be heard in closed session? Seeing none, public comment is
now closed. Do we have a motion to convene
in closed session? Thank you.
So we are now in closed session.
>> Clerk: we are now back in session.
They took the following actions.
For agenda items 14 to 18 18 recommended to the full board of
supervisors and for 19 and 20,
the items are continued to the government oversight and audit committee.
All taken unanimously.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you.
Do I have a motion to not disclose the proceedings from the closed session. >> so moved.
>> Supervisor Mar: thank you. Any further business?
>> Clerk: there's no further business.
>> Supervisor Mar: we are adjourned. Thank you.